Yingluck 'involved in corruption'

[mikemac]

US, Europe & Japan lose huge amounts on subsidies year after year.

They put money aside for it in budgets and calculate for it. They don't call it self financing when it is costing money. If they had not put it on the balance sheet and budgeted for it it would be criminal. Just like it is here.

The PTP could not budget for it as they had already the max deficit allowable, they would have to cut other vote-buying policies then.

PTP hoped that it would be self funded. Many governments around the world have also lost huge amounts on what they thought would be self financing energy investments when the price of oil fell. None of them have though been charged with negligence and corruption, because of a change in market prices, in which they have no control.

Clutching at straws comes to mind.

Many governments around the world would have dumped the Shins years ago, not worth the trouble.

[waitforusalso]

US, Europe & Japan lose huge amounts on subsidies year after year.

They put money aside for it in budgets and calculate for it. They don't call it self financing when it is costing money. If they had not put it on the balance sheet and budgeted for it it would be criminal. Just like it is here.

The PTP could not budget for it as they had already the max deficit allowable, they would have to cut other vote-buying policies then.

PTP hoped that it would be self funded. Many governments around the world have also lost huge amounts on what they thought would be self financing energy investments when the price of oil fell. None of them have though been charged with negligence and corruption, because of a change in market prices, in which they have no control.

Clutching at straws comes to mind.

Many governments around the world would have dumped the Shins years ago, not worth the trouble.

You & your buddies are clutching guns, suppression & intimidation. Congratulations!

[Thaddeus]

And now democracy is dead in Thailand.

She was legally elected by a majority of the people and how many of those elected the present regime?

Missed basic maths class again, and logic 101?

[rubl]

There have been similar schemes like the rice pledging scheme in other countries and on different continents. There too governments tried interfere and manipulate the world markets and in most cases they failed. Australia had a scheme were the government was buying off all the wool from sheep farmers and placing them into storage to drive world market prices through the roof.

The intention in Thailand too was to store the rice until the prices went up far the previous levels and to gain from that. Unfortunately that failed because Thailand might have been the rice exporter number one on the world stage but there was serious competition from other countries that jumped to supply and fill the demand that Thailand created artificially.

Certainly like the schemes in other countries that don’t constitute crimes but a failed economic and fiscal policy that the voters should punish. That would require that people are informed and what decisions have been taken on their behalf, let’s not forget they voted for these governments, and what it will mean for the short and long term future. In Australia and Europe people realised that and voted accordingly, in Thailand that seems to be not the case because whoever is in power, may that be reds or blue/yellows seem to take decisions that in the short term will be of benefit to their supporters but in the long term harm the country.

In Yingluck’s case, she gambled on a world market she tried to control and manipulate but she failed and for that she deserves to be punished but not by the courts but by the electorate. Taken legal steps against her without having proof that she personally benefited from it or that she ensured that associates benefited from it without having evidence to support it is a step onto very thin ice.

What future politician will be prepared to make a decision if the threat of criminal actions against him might loom not knowing if his/her decision actually might be beneficial for the country or fail? That should be left to the voters and being the judge of it; and well educated and informed voters will ensure that it will not happen again.

You forget one thing.

The RPPS was positioned as 'self-financing' scheme, defended as such. No need to reserve a few billions in the National Budget. At the end it cost 700 billion Baht.

Now if the Yingluck Government had positioned their RPPS as 'subsidy' requiring a hundred billion per year and put it in the National Budget, then there would be no real problem.

As it is just calling Ms. Yingluck negligent seems very mild and kind indeed.

Edited January 18, 2015 by rubl

[Wombat6]

See the nation is really showing it's allegiance to the yellow dem junta coalition .

No need for attitude adjustment with them it's always been there and they just keep churning out bias articles which sends the yellow dems into a zombie like feeding frenzy.

Won't help at election time though!

For you to be critical of Attitude adjustment and Bias, you really have to look at yourself. For years you have been stuttering the same old brainwashed type of gibberish to the point where most people don't take any notice of what you say. The term "thick as two bricks" come to mind whenever yout name appears and makes one suspect you are being paid by the Coward in the desert to comment

[rubl]

She may well have been involved in corruption but like the others weren't?

Do the words pot kettle and black mean anything to those that want a prosecution

I think there are far more important things to worry about here than the prosecution of an ex politician

The only difference is the current lot have rewritten the laws so that anything they do is legal. To paraphrase our esteemed PM: do not worry about where myself and my brother got all our millions. That is not your concern.

I'm not sure that they are impeaching the right PM!

Since this is about the RPPS they are addressing the right former PM.

[rubl]

Well, this is nothing more than predictable. The heading, "Yingluck involved in corruption" is false. She is not guilty until proven so in a court of law. Guilty or not, there is clearly a witchhunt going on here. Corruption has been rife in Thailand at all levels of Government and in all shades of politics for years. It is clear nothing has been learned from the past. Sooner or later the Junta will be removed, elections will be held, a new leader will be elected and the cycle of corruption and payback will begin again. Anyone who thinks the removal of Yingluck without a similar purge within the democrats, local government and their buddies in industry etc is going to resolve anything is kidding themselves.

Since Ms. Yingluck was in charge of the RPPS and she supervised, since she was in control of her cabinet, etc., etc. AND since there is corruption in the schme, it would seem the topic title is corrupt.

What needs to be proven is if she was actively involved, just condoning corruption (i.e. negligent) or just plain ignorant of all.

[rubl]

There have been similar schemes like the rice pledging scheme in other countries and on different continents. There too governments tried interfere and manipulate the world markets and in most cases they failed. Australia had a scheme were the government was buying off all the wool from sheep farmers and placing them into storage to drive world market prices through the roof.

The intention in Thailand too was to store the rice until the prices went up far the previous levels and to gain from that. Unfortunately that failed because Thailand might have been the rice exporter number one on the world stage but there was serious competition from other countries that jumped to supply and fill the demand that Thailand created artificially.

Certainly like the schemes in other countries that don’t constitute crimes but a failed economic and fiscal policy that the voters should punish. That would require that people are informed and what decisions have been taken on their behalf, let’s not forget they voted for these governments, and what it will mean for the short and long term future. In Australia and Europe people realised that and voted accordingly, in Thailand that seems to be not the case because whoever is in power, may that be reds or blue/yellows seem to take decisions that in the short term will be of benefit to their supporters but in the long term harm the country.

In Yingluck’s case, she gambled on a world market she tried to control and manipulate but she failed and for that she deserves to be punished but not by the courts but by the electorate. Taken legal steps against her without having proof that she personally benefited from it or that she ensured that associates benefited from it without having evidence to support it is a step onto very thin ice.

What future politician will be prepared to make a decision if the threat of criminal actions against him might loom not knowing if his/her decision actually might be beneficial for the country or fail? That should be left to the voters and being the judge of it; and well educated and informed voters will ensure that it will not happen again.

There is a big difference between making a bad decision, and making a bad decision and then persisting with it and refusing to reverse or at the very least, amend the decision, in spite of piles of evidence that showed the damage it was doing. That's gross negligence and if you think the only punishment it deserves is the risk of being voted out of office then I think you are being extraordinarily kind on politicians and giving then a lot of scope for bringing a country to its knees and then walking away with a shrug off the shoulders and a, 'oh well, that didn't work out so well but not to worry, the voters are really the ones to blame for voting me in in the first place'.

Subsidies making massive losses are continued year after year in US, Europe & Japan.

The Rice Price Pledging Scheme was not a 'subsidy' which required a reservation in the National Budget. The RPPS was positioned as 'self-financing' scheme.

That's the difference.

[Baerboxer]

I'm no fan of the Shins, but if Yingluck wants to really damage the Junta she should stay in Thailand. Putting her in jail or on trial would make her a bit of an Aung San Suu Kyi figure. If she flees to a mansion in Dubai or Beijing and is seen shopping at Chanel and Prada every day, the Junta can use this as well as the 'fugitive' factor to promote their own agenda. They can't use her when she's in jail (it would actually weaken the Junta in my opinion).

However, I doubt Yingluck has the bravery of her Burmese counterpart to follow her principles. We shall see.

Yingluck is a woman, so is Aung San Suu Kyi.

There any similarity ends.

[Baerboxer]

PTP hoped that it would be self funded. Many governments around the world have also lost huge amounts on what they thought would be self financing energy investments when the price of oil fell. None of them have though been charged with negligence and corruption, because of a change in market prices, in which they have no control.

Clutching at straws comes to mind.

Many governments around the world would have dumped the Shins years ago, not worth the trouble.

You & your buddies are clutching guns, suppression & intimidation. Congratulations!

Use of suppression, intimidation and violence - sounds like the Shins. Grenades anyone?

[ianf]

I'm no fan of the Shins, but if Yingluck wants to really damage the Junta she should stay in Thailand. Putting her in jail or on trial would make her a bit of an Aung San Suu Kyi figure. If she flees to a mansion in Dubai or Beijing and is seen shopping at Chanel and Prada every day, the Junta can use this as well as the 'fugitive' factor to promote their own agenda. They can't use her when she's in jail (it would actually weaken the Junta in my opinion).

However, I doubt Yingluck has the bravery of her Burmese counterpart to follow her principles. We shall see.

Pardon? An Aung San Suu Kyi figure? Yingluck had/has no personal commitment to the oppressed masses in the way that The Lady has. Yingluck was simply a pawn in a rich family's game of trying to seize undemocratic power. I feel sorry for Ying because under the Thai system she really was compelled to follow Big Bro's orders but I do not believe that for one minute she had any political principles at all. That wasn't her game. She was simply a proxy for He in Dubai. She was used and abused. However, she is a grown up and must face the consequences. Or run away.

[scorecard]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

People should be able to see "right from wrong" and once facts are clarified to the public.

So after endless years of depriving the vast majority of normal Thai people adequate education and a full history of lies and corruption from all sides, military and governmental they now believe that all these people are going to understand the in's and out's of the country's constitutional procedures, then all walk away in agreement she is at fault completely. WRONG

As far as the people are concerned they will see it as they have always known it and this will be collective bullying in destroying the woman and all her supporters in an attempt to remove this element from being involved in any democratic process the near future may hold.

It is quite clear that these people can not win over the vast majority of this country through democracy. Only dictatorial measures such as these will have any chance of success. She is out of the picture and the country is at ease. Why stir up trouble? Maybe they think a war on the people will be the best road to take.

Rubbish.

[samii]

These Junta clowns are repeating their 2006 failure. They have silenced all opposition voices with their guns and oppression and now idiotically believe that the dearth of criticism of their ridiculously biased actions is proof of their correctness and vast public support - idiots one and all. This right wing extremist joke is hurtling inevitably towards its deserved demise

"Examples need to be set that those who commit wrong will be punished, so no future leaders dare repeat these actions. This will create sustainable reconciliation," the NACC member said.

- Does this line of thinking apply to the Army leaders and the coups they continually inflict upon the nation? Selective justice is no justice at all!

Reconciliation cannot be forced by one side onto the other at the barrel of a gun.

so you like that this corruption from shinawatres continou !!

was ever an political leader imposed by fake and vote buying system kicked out by democratic rules ??

Did change any Dictatorship by democratic votes ?

Will Kim Jung Un step down if in election he would get less than 50% ??

So this is what you say !!

lets Korean people deside in a vote if Kim is the elected president !

From which country you are ? ( ISAAN ? ) ;

"shinawatres continuo"

"was ever an political leader imposed by fake and vote "

From which country...Never mind

Read this short bacground of corruption and vote buying (easy read for everyone)

http://asiancorrespondent.com/20459/the-democrats-vote-buying-and-suthep/

[waitforusalso]

There have been similar schemes like the rice pledging scheme in other countries and on different continents. There too governments tried interfere and manipulate the world markets and in most cases they failed. Australia had a scheme were the government was buying off all the wool from sheep farmers and placing them into storage to drive world market prices through the roof.

The intention in Thailand too was to store the rice until the prices went up far the previous levels and to gain from that. Unfortunately that failed because Thailand might have been the rice exporter number one on the world stage but there was serious competition from other countries that jumped to supply and fill the demand that Thailand created artificially.

Certainly like the schemes in other countries that don’t constitute crimes but a failed economic and fiscal policy that the voters should punish. That would require that people are informed and what decisions have been taken on their behalf, let’s not forget they voted for these governments, and what it will mean for the short and long term future. In Australia and Europe people realised that and voted accordingly, in Thailand that seems to be not the case because whoever is in power, may that be reds or blue/yellows seem to take decisions that in the short term will be of benefit to their supporters but in the long term harm the country.

In Yingluck’s case, she gambled on a world market she tried to control and manipulate but she failed and for that she deserves to be punished but not by the courts but by the electorate. Taken legal steps against her without having proof that she personally benefited from it or that she ensured that associates benefited from it without having evidence to support it is a step onto very thin ice.

What future politician will be prepared to make a decision if the threat of criminal actions against him might loom not knowing if his/her decision actually might be beneficial for the country or fail? That should be left to the voters and being the judge of it; and well educated and informed voters will ensure that it will not happen again.

There is a big difference between making a bad decision, and making a bad decision and then persisting with it and refusing to reverse or at the very least, amend the decision, in spite of piles of evidence that showed the damage it was doing. That's gross negligence and if you think the only punishment it deserves is the risk of being voted out of office then I think you are being extraordinarily kind on politicians and giving then a lot of scope for bringing a country to its knees and then walking away with a shrug off the shoulders and a, 'oh well, that didn't work out so well but not to worry, the voters are really the ones to blame for voting me in in the first place'.

Subsidies making massive losses are continued year after year in US, Europe & Japan.

The Rice Price Pledging Scheme was not a 'subsidy' which required a reservation in the National Budget. The RPPS was positioned as 'self-financing' scheme.

That's the difference.

The scheme would have been 'self-financing' if the market price had increased to a point.

Similar to the massive investments into energy by the US which are not financially viable as soon as the oil price rises above a certain point.

[Rhys]

Hmmm..do they know the color of brown rice?

[tbthailand]

Nope, I was serious. They misled the country. In fact, lied to the country. Suthep wanted the government to step fown so fresh elections could be held. Government stepped down and Suthep violently stopped the elections so there could be a coup. Prayuth told everybody he has ne desire to be PM. Then elected himself PM. Elections promised 2015. Now 2016. It'll never happen. In the meantime the tourist industry is down the toilet. Prayuth is putting his cronies in the top government positions and forbade freedom of speech. All of this has cost the country billions of baht. I could go on but you get my drift. They should be impeached too. But that will never happen as he will write laws into the consitution absolving himself and all of his mates from being charged should a democratic process every happen again in Thailand.

Suthep wanted the government to resign. They didn't resign.

didn't resign?

what do you call dissolving parliament and calling elections?

[tbthailand]

There is a big difference between making a bad decision, and making a bad decision and then persisting with it and refusing to reverse or at the very least, amend the decision, in spite of piles of evidence that showed the damage it was doing. That's gross negligence and if you think the only punishment it deserves is the risk of being voted out of office then I think you are being extraordinarily kind on politicians and giving then a lot of scope for bringing a country to its knees and then walking away with a shrug off the shoulders and a, 'oh well, that didn't work out so well but not to worry, the voters are really the ones to blame for voting me in in the first place'.

Subsidies making massive losses are continued year after year in US, Europe & Japan.

The Rice Price Pledging Scheme was not a 'subsidy' which required a reservation in the National Budget. The RPPS was positioned as 'self-financing' scheme.

That's the difference.

The scheme would have been 'self-financing' if the market price had increased to a point.

Similar to the massive investments into energy by the US which are not financially viable as soon as the oil price rises above a certain point.

no one besides rubl believes that she is being impeached because the program was touted as self-financing.

[JAG]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

People should be able to see "right from wrong" and once facts are clarified to the public.

So after endless years of depriving the vast majority of normal Thai people adequate education and a full history of lies and corruption from all sides, military and governmental they now believe that all these people are going to understand the in's and out's of the country's constitutional procedures, then all walk away in agreement she is at fault completely. WRONG

As far as the people are concerned they will see it as they have always known it and this will be collective bullying in destroying the woman and all her supporters in an attempt to remove this element from being involved in any democratic process the near future may hold.

It is quite clear that these people can not win over the vast majority of this country through democracy. Only dictatorial measures such as these will have any chance of success. She is out of the picture and the country is at ease. Why stir up trouble? Maybe they think a war on the people will be the best road to take.

Rubbish.

On the contrary, a perceptive accurate assessment of what is happening-

[Thai at Heart]

So what happened to make them all of a sudden chase a legal case too?

This will turn into one very long running farce. If they haven't got hard proof that she personally profited from the system they are going to look like fool and will have created a martyr for their own downfall.

Who reckons that she personally profited? I don't.

I'd have thought the Shins too smart at this game to allow any direct connections or traceable money flows. But greed is a strange driver, so who knows yet what they've uncovered.

Something around those false G2G deals maybe?

Exactly. And if she did it will be through proxies so very difficult if not impossible to track since they arent exactly famous for deep investigation in Thailand.

[JAG]

Nope, I was serious. They misled the country. In fact, lied to the country. Suthep wanted the government to step fown so fresh elections could be held. Government stepped down and Suthep violently stopped the elections so there could be a coup. Prayuth told everybody he has ne desire to be PM. Then elected himself PM. Elections promised 2015. Now 2016. It'll never happen. In the meantime the tourist industry is down the toilet. Prayuth is putting his cronies in the top government positions and forbade freedom of speech. All of this has cost the country billions of baht. I could go on but you get my drift. They should be impeached too. But that will never happen as he will write laws into the consitution absolving himself and all of his mates from being charged should a democratic process every happen again in Thailand.

Suthep wanted the government to resign. They didn't resign.

didn't resign?

what do you call dissolving parliament and calling elections?

What Suthep and his backers wanted was for the government to throw in the towel and hand over power to them.

Instead they dissolved parliament and called elections.

The elections were stopped and the coup was sprung to put Sutheps backers in power.

Perhaps we should call it plan B.

And reforms? Behind all the bullshit and the odd old score being settled, the only reforms will be those that ensure that these backers remain in power.

[tbthailand]

Nope, I was serious. They misled the country. In fact, lied to the country. Suthep wanted the government to step fown so fresh elections could be held. Government stepped down and Suthep violently stopped the elections so there could be a coup. Prayuth told everybody he has ne desire to be PM. Then elected himself PM. Elections promised 2015. Now 2016. It'll never happen. In the meantime the tourist industry is down the toilet. Prayuth is putting his cronies in the top government positions and forbade freedom of speech. All of this has cost the country billions of baht. I could go on but you get my drift. They should be impeached too. But that will never happen as he will write laws into the consitution absolving himself and all of his mates from being charged should a democratic process every happen again in Thailand.

Suthep wanted the government to resign. They didn't resign.

didn't resign?

what do you call dissolving parliament and calling elections?

What Suthep and his backers wanted was for the government to throw in the towel and hand over power to them.

Instead they dissolved parliament and called elections.

The elections were stopped and the coup was sprung to put Sutheps backers in power.

Perhaps we should call it plan B.

And reforms? Behind all the bullshit and the odd old score being settled, the only reforms will be those that ensure that these backers remain in power.

please allow me to quote a post from this thread...

... a perceptive accurate assessment of what is happening

Suthep's plan was always a pipe-dream if you took it literally because there was no constitutionally valid way to do what he was describing (note that the current CDC is trying to write that into the new constitution). So in all likelihood, Plan A was a judicial coup a la 2008, and Plan B was the implementation of Suthep's ideas which necessitated a military 'intervention'.

So yes, we are living through 'Plan B' at the moment.

As a side note, I am wondering how hard they tried to change the loyalties of the MPs this time around. Clearly they took a different route in the end, but still, I'm curious.

[rubl]

The Rice Price Pledging Scheme was not a 'subsidy' which required a reservation in the National Budget. The RPPS was positioned as 'self-financing' scheme.

That's the difference.

The scheme would have been 'self-financing' if the market price had increased to a point.

Similar to the massive investments into energy by the US which are not financially viable as soon as the oil price rises above a certain point.

The Yingluck government positioned and defended the RPPS as self-financing. Even in September 2012 their great thinker stated in an interview the scheme was just and should be continued. To use the unsupportive attitude of the World Market as excuse now to explain 700 billion Baht loss seems like the continuation of a swindle.

[waitforusalso]

[rubl]

Nope, I was serious. They misled the country. In fact, lied to the country. Suthep wanted the government to step fown so fresh elections could be held. Government stepped down and Suthep violently stopped the elections so there could be a coup. Prayuth told everybody he has ne desire to be PM. Then elected himself PM. Elections promised 2015. Now 2016. It'll never happen. In the meantime the tourist industry is down the toilet. Prayuth is putting his cronies in the top government positions and forbade freedom of speech. All of this has cost the country billions of baht. I could go on but you get my drift. They should be impeached too. But that will never happen as he will write laws into the consitution absolving himself and all of his mates from being charged should a democratic process every happen again in Thailand.

Suthep wanted the government to resign. They didn't resign.

didn't resign?

what do you call dissolving parliament and calling elections?

I'd call it not the same. Ms. Yingluck even insisted for a moment she wouldn't dissolve the House or resign before stating she was willing to dissolve the House or resign. In January 2014 as caretaker PM she stated not to resign following with stating she was willing to resign.

So, not the same.

[rubl]

The scheme would have been 'self-financing' if the market price had increased to a point.

Similar to the massive investments into energy by the US which are not financially viable as soon as the oil price rises above a certain point.

no one besides rubl believes that she is being impeached because the program was touted as self-financing.

As usual you guys still try to divert from the issue.

Ms. Yingluck is in this impeachment process because she and her cabinet positioned and defended the RPPS as 'self-financing', continued to defend it and managed to lose the country 700 billion Baht.

Had she positioned the RPPS as 'subsidy' requiring some, limited reservations in the National Budget, she would not be in the position she's in now.

[Eric Loh]

It's interesting to see that public opinion is very much with Yingluck in this NACC relentless pursuit. Most articles in the mass media related to this case that invite public opinion seem to take side with Yingluck. As Professor Somchai deputy rector of the Chiangmai University opined that if the NLA was to act on their conscience, they will ruled against the charge to impeach her. I agree.

[whybother]

Suthep wanted the government to resign. They didn't resign.

didn't resign?

what do you call dissolving parliament and calling elections?

I call it dissolving parliament and calling elections. I don't call that resigning. If she had resigned, she wouldn't be PM, care-taker or otherwise.

[Baerboxer]

It's interesting to see that public opinion is very much with Yingluck in this NACC relentless pursuit. Most articles in the mass media related to this case that invite public opinion seem to take side with Yingluck. As Professor Somchai deputy rector of the Chiangmai University opined that if the NLA was to act on their conscience, they will ruled against the charge to impeach her. I agree.

Eric, we all know you think the sun shines out her arse and that she's totally innocent of doing any wrong ever.

All the public opinion I've heard from Thai friends, colleagues including many who voted for PTP is that she's been as negligent as possible, Simply didn't do anything other than what her criminal brother instructed from his fugitive havens,

Chaingmai University - isn't she an alumni of that place? A former class president, student leader of some sort? Still he's playing safe as her family's private militia are centered there and not known for the tolerance of free speech and speaking against their masters.

Do you really think she is so dumb that she had no ideas of what was really going on? Or did she simply chose to ignore it, along with all the oaths she swore when taking office - and ignored too?

[rubl]

It's interesting to see that public opinion is very much with Yingluck in this NACC relentless pursuit. Most articles in the mass media related to this case that invite public opinion seem to take side with Yingluck. As Professor Somchai deputy rector of the Chiangmai University opined that if the NLA was to act on their conscience, they will ruled against the charge to impeach her. I agree.

I won't ask for a poll on this as you wouldn't accept the results anyway.

If the NLA is acting on it's conscience they would impeach Ms. Yingluck. She is still avoiding questions, gives answers unrelated to questions asked and is intend on dodging responsibility.

[Thai at Heart]

It's interesting to see that public opinion is very much with Yingluck in this NACC relentless pursuit. Most articles in the mass media related to this case that invite public opinion seem to take side with Yingluck. As Professor Somchai deputy rector of the Chiangmai University opined that if the NLA was to act on their conscience, they will ruled against the charge to impeach her. I agree.

I won't ask for a poll on this as you wouldn't accept the results anyway.

If the NLA is acting on it's conscience they would impeach Ms. Yingluck. She is still avoiding questions, gives answers unrelated to questions asked and is intend on dodging responsibility.

I would prefer they stick to provable facts versus their conscience.